Amazon Holiday Deals

3D Tip Jar

Recent Comments

Amazon mp3s

Promote Your Blog

Obama shoots for the moon while aiming at his toes

I didn’t catch any of the inaugural. I regard inauguration the same  way I regard the two weeks of Super Bowl hype -  inconsequential to life on any level. Still, thanks to the new inventions of Facebook and Twitter, one could keep track of the festivities and of the all-important speech given by our recently re-elected president.

I read somewhere that inaugurals haven taken the usual shape since the Wilson administration, which is to not make pinpoint policy pushes but to aim more for an overview of the coming administration. Obama’s speech, at least the excerpts I read, booted that with a frame in mind of progressive causes du jour such as climate change, immigration and social justice.

Instantaneously, we’ve been transmitted from a world with 8-percent unemployment, little growth and a disappearing middle class. Instead, our main goals are to blend our tradition of self-reliance with a new approach to the common good, especially how it relates to the climate and civil rights. Happy that you recently traded your job as a manager at manufacturing firm in for a set of drive-thru headphones? Too bad.

None of this will happen. Climate change was tabled during the days before 2010 when Democrats overwhelmingly controlled the Senate and House. Cap-and-Trade, introduced during a 60 Senator Democrat majority, was dead on arrival. Despite Sandy, it sure won’t fly in the face of the 4-degree temperatures I’m currently enjoying here in the Midwest. There is no hope in the world of this getting through a Republican House, especially one that has built up an electoral wall as it has. Unless all House Republicans are revealed as charter members of NAMBLA during the next two years, this won’t happen, and even then, he has less than two years to implement.

Gay rights? Gay marriage has only been a common cause of the president for less than a year. He ran against gay marriage his first campaign. Who takes this seriously as a Seneca Falls moment when he recently came to Jesus with it, especially in as a calculating manner in which he did, as a fledge toward rich gays for donations? Apparently Obama is willing to get tied in this while millions look for work, or work for more pay.

Immigration? Here he has hope. A lot of Republicans, especially Marco Rubio, are changing their attitude toward the immigration issue in wake of the party’s falling with the Hispanic population from 2004 to 2012. It should also be noted that deportations stayed high during the Obama administration.

Obama has clearly become a victim of reading his own press clippings. He should have taken a page from Bill Clinton. Focus on the economy, focus on growth. Become a friend to business. That capital gains rate that Obama so excoriated Mitt Romney for paying? It was implemented during the second term of Clinton. Instead Obama has done the opposite, using the same rhetoric he has used since he entered office, the same rhetoric that FDR used, the same rhetoric that led the business community in this country to sit on over a $1 trillion that could be pumped into the economy at the present time. Business won’t invest if the climate isn’t right, Obama has not made the climate right.

Republicans have been waiting for a bright light in the days since early November. They found it and the president flipped the switch.

17 comments to Obama shoots for the moon while aiming at his toes

  • Rufus

    But the two coaches are brothers! How can we cover that in just two weeks?

  • Rufus

    Every one of your points is correct. Yet, it’s a guarantee that no one in the press will call Obama on any of it.

  • JohnFN

    I’ve read a couple calling him out, but it doesn’t matter if they do or not. Obamawill be judged on what has done. Clinton found ways to work with Congress, Obama is clearly intent on bludgeoning them. Good luck in this economy. Who would have thought James Carville was talking about Obama all those years ago.

  • JohnFN

    I guess I shouldn’t rip the NFL so much, but I can’t stand the league anymore. There is never an offseason, it is constantly on TV even in the middle of the summer. And the NFL brand of football is built to be un-fun, the opposite of college, which I adore. Ironically, I quit loving the league when Ray Lewis made his first Super Bowl and the NFL was working hard to rehabilitate him.

    • Rufus

      I was being sarcastic about the coaches. I hate Super Bowl journalism as much as you. I am conflicted; Lewis was a thug who should have gone to jail but I like Flacco. Maybe Lewis has sincerely changed his ways, but I’m beyond tired of the coverage.

  • Scott M.

    The Idiot Party,John?

  • goozer

    heh…that’s a funny story about how the GOP thinks it’ll take back the Senate. Written by the same guys who wrote the stories about Presidents McCain and Romney.

    No more fairy tales for me. Let. It. Burn.

    • Scott M.

      Amen to that…to hell with this third world country.

    • Kit

      Goozer, saying the Republicans “can” take back the Senate is different from saying it “will”.

      And “Let. It. Burn.”? This country has been through FAR worse than a conniving group of Chicago thugs.
      Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVO46No-4qM

      As Tolkien said “Despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt. We do not.”

      And, Scott, “third world country”? You clearly have no idea how bad things can get and we are nowhere near there yet.

      • goozer

        I am very aware of our nation’s history. I wish that more of our citizens were as well, especially as regards our founding documents, and what our charge in them truly is. I am fully cognizant of what that means.

        Were this 1813, instead of 2013, I truly believe that the march on the Capital(s) by the people would be well in progress.

        However, as I have intimated in the past, we are more akin to the Roman Republic, and are awaiting this ages Sulla. This nation is no more permanent than any other in history. The math is clear. What cannot continue will not continue. This is not despair, it is acceptance of reality.

        • Kit

          So, you have just given up?

          “This is not despair, it is acceptance of reality.”

          No, its despair.

          What you are saying is that since our decline is inevitable there is nothing we can do to delay it or at least temporarily reverse it. That is despair.
          Well, as a 23 year old who might live to see, if your prediction holds true, not just Sulla but Caesar I intend to do everything to halt or delay or at least temporarily reverse our decline.
          The way I see it, we may eventually reach Sulla but we don’t have to let ourselves reach that point yet.
          And if it does? If democracy dies and Sulla comes, what then? When you are dying in your bed (or in the hallway of a state hospital), seeing our country as a wasted failed state, won’t you want to know that you did everything you possibly could to stop it. Won’t you want your conscience clear? I do.
          To borrow from a poet, freedom and liberty should not go gentle into that good night but should rage, rage against the dying of the light.

            • Rufus

              Kit, I won’t begrudge you your optimism, but I’m personally responsible for the lives, health and well-being of too many people to pin my hopes on dreams or wishes. To use your Rome analogy; there were plenty of Roman citizens confidently waiting for the next Caesar as the Visigoths stormed across the Danube.

              Is America over? Will we be overrun by the Chinese tomorrow? In a year? No. But will the next decade be better than the prior one? Almost definitely not. Will the next 50 years be better than the prior 50 years? I’m not banking on it.

              I’m twice your age and old enough to remember Jimmy Carter’s malaise. Back then it also felt like America was in decline. America WAS in decline. Then Ronald Reagan became President. So why do I believe it’s different this time?

              Something has changed in this country and it’s significant, and, I believe, irreversible. We’ve all written reams on this site speculating on what that might be; the collapse of the family, the failure of schools to teach Constitutional principles, the absence of fathers, the proliferation of entertainment, over-regulation… I don’t feel confident I know, but it doesn’t matter if I know the reason(s).

              Even when Carter was in office most Americans spoke of independence. Most Americans were ashamed to take money from others. Most men were ashamed to sire children and not support them. Christian ideals were everywhere. They were held up, side by side, with American ideals. The state of Illinois (and I assume many other states) would not let children go to High School without first passing a civics test similar to what immigrants pass to become U.S. citizens.

              Kit, as I wrote, I can’t confidently state what has caused the change, but I am confident that change has come and a majority of my fellow citizens do not want liberty, independence or the personal responsibility that comes with them. We want our leaders to tell us what size soda to drink, what choices should be in our vending machines, how many bullets should be in our guns, what questions our doctors should ask us, how many miles per gallon our car should get, how much water our toilets should use, what type of artificial light we should have in our homes, how much of our income we can keep, what stance our religion should have on contraception. And on, and on, and on…

              A federal government taking a portion of a man’s wages (a portion they determine and change whenever it pleases them) is far more onerous than anything King George III did to the Colonists who fought for their independence. The TSA has violated more American citizens’ personal effects than the British armed forces. The Colonists were furious they had to quarter troops? Our government now freely seizes private residences to build shopping malls. Not a temporary seizure, like quartering troops. They actually take your home and the land it stands on. To build a strip mall. If you are dying of an illness and you meet a citizen who claims he has created a cure you cannot purchase the medicine, nor can you take it, unless the Federal government approves! Last year the Supreme Court made a precedent that the Congress can force you to make purchases against your will.

              Kit, we freely accept that the Federal government has the authority to determine how much of the wages from our labor we can keep. We freely accept that the Federal government can determine what we put into our bodies. We freely accept that the Federal government can determine what types of health products and procedures we can and cannot employ, even when our very lives are on the line. The Supreme Court has ruled that all 50 states can seize any citizen’s private residence for any reason. The Federal government can decide that your vehicle was used in a drug crime and seize it, with no prior notice and with no obligation to return it to you unless you initiate a legal proceeding to prove your innocence. They can do the same with anything you own. The Federal government can decide what type of education your children must receive, and how much, and for how many years.

              Kit, Congress legislated the destruction of our Republic long ago, and they’ve ratcheted up their control incrementally. And now we have a majority of citizens who believe the government’s role is to keep them safe. Good luck with that.

              Caesar has crossed the Rubicon.

  • Rufus

    Krauthammer had a good take on this. The only thing more astounding than President Obama’s disregard for the Constitution and State’s rights is the citizenry’s lack of concern.

    • Kit

      Its not that new.
      This is why I think we’re looking at something similar to the 1930s. There you had a belief around the western world that democratic processes were old-fashioned. Heck, there was even a car called “The Dictator”. FDR was able to massively expand the federal government and federal power in ways never seen before during peacetime in US history because the people had come to the idea that you need effective leadership that can cut through the red tape and gridlock or that society is too complex to be run by the previous democratic processes. And that is what Obama is -and was- promising.

      Also, and Andrew Price has pointed this out, conservatives sort of assume that, like Dems on Global Warming, “everyone agrees on this issue.” We have to argue for the basic principles of the constitution.

      Why is state’s rights a good idea?
      Why is limited government a good idea?

      You have to articulate them in simple language and connect them to your policy ideas. Its not hard, Reagan did it. Lawyers and teachers and advertisers do it all the time.
      Example from Ronnie: “From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?”

      Right there in under 60 words, in plain and simple language, is an argument for limited government and the idea that power is best when distributed and not held in the hands of “an elite group”.

      Its so easy a caveman could do it.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>